Incomprehensible good ideas

Question

Sometimes someone has a great idea that solves a problem. But over time, people forget why this was a great idea, and try to use it in such a way that the problems are ultimately bad (or worse) than the idea was originally supposed to solve.

Example:

I am sure that distributed source control is enough that people try to create conventions that are the point of control of a distributed source.

Example 2:

it’s very natural to think that when you write code, you should handle all the errors that arrise can make. But the function does not always have enough information to handle the error, so all it can do is say somehow, whoever calls it, that an error has occurred. The error of manually picking up calls is tedious, so exceptions have been invented. Without the extra stuff on the part of the programmer, exceptions will bubble up the call stack until someone can do something with them. It seems that proven exceptions, at least in practice, tarnish the surprisingness of exceptions. In the best case, the programmer should tirelessly work his way up a possible call stack, indicating that each method throws this exception to the extent that it can be (if it can be processed). Worse,she can grasp the exception avoid chores!

, , , - , - ?

: , " " , - , .

Answer 1

... ... , - - HTTP, (ASP.NET, JSF ..), ? , , - , -, , .

?

Answer 2

, DVCS. DVCS, Subversion, , .